Talk:BRIO
How Do The Administrators See This Page? I, for one, feel that this page is not necessarily something that falls within the TWR wiki's boundaries. James and FDMG, thoughts? OrigamiAirEnforcer 03:45, January 26, 2012 (UTC) My thoughts on this page are, despite not being made by Learning Curve, the BRIO Thomas trains are technically made by a professional wooden railway company. Besides, I have added a link to the BRIO page on the 22 Piece Starter Set page, and I personally feel that the BRIO page should be expanded upon. I was originally planning to work on Neil's page tomorrow by adding a picture of him in his box, but when I found out that someone added a BRIO page to the TWR wiki, I felt it needed more attention. I have just gathered a bunch of pictures of BRIO Thomas items that have not been added to the BRIO page yet, and if the BRIO page stays long enough to the TWR wiki, I plan to upload those pictures and post them on that page. So in conclusion, whether or not the other users of the TWR wiki think so, I think the BRIO page should stay on the TWR wiki. FDMG, 8:24 A.M. Approx. FlyingDuckManGenesis 13:24, January 26, 2012 (UTC) I a not a fan, we are the Thomas Wooden Railway Wiki, not the Brio Wooden Railway Wiki. We cover the TWR line made by Learning Curve, and Learning Curve only. I vote the page is deleted. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 19:08, January 27, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 Given that appears there are 2 admins opposed and only 1 in favor, I believe the page and all associated pictures should be deleted. OrigamiAirEnforcer 23:14, January 27, 2012 (UTC) R.I.P. BRIO Page? My Final Thoughts Since this page might end up deleted, and seeing as two outnumber one, I feel that even though I don't want to start a conflict with OrigamiAirEnforcer or Jamesis5, who both oppose the BRIO page being on the TWR Wiki, or even any other contributors who oppose the BRIO page, for that matter, I might as well say that maybe I could have addressed my opinion yesterday a little bit better. Even though I did mention in my opinion that I added a link to the BRIO page on the 22 Piece Starter Set page, I could have mentioned that I added the link so that people on the TWR Wiki who don't know what BRIO engines look like can see for themselves. I also could have mentioned in my opinion that I could have covered the Trivia for the BRIO Thomas models, such as the accuracy compared to their Learning Curve counterparts, Diesel 10's crane-like arm, and Butch's Brio model predating his Learning Curve model. I already mentioned in my opinion yesterday that I planned to add more pictures to the BRIO page, had the page stayed up long enough. Fortunately for me, I did get to upload the pictures, but seeing as the page may end up being deleted soon, I feel all my efforts to get those pictures will have gone to waste. After all, I've gone to many different web sites to get them. That's all I have to say. Even though I feel it's no use arguing with the other contributors of the TWR Wiki, not that I want to argue in the first place, I felt I might as well get my final thoughts on why I disagree with the possible deletion of the BRIO page out of the way. Thank you for your time. FDMG, 6:56 P.M. Approx. FlyingDuckManGenesis 23:56, January 27, 2012 (UTC) :I suppose the page and images could be retained. However, I believe the only items that should be featured are ones that have been made by LC, and that such BRIO products should be entered as subordinates on their LC counterpart's page. Such as BRIO Percy being entered under Percy's page with a notation in the triva box only and the picture in the gallery. OrigamiAirEnforcer 00:24, January 28, 2012 (UTC) ::I want the page gone, period. I mean, what is next? A Mellisa & Doug page ir a page for every other company every to make a wooden train compatable with TWR? We are the Thomas Wooden Railway Wiki, not Wooden Railway Wiki. My opinion will remain the same. Sorry I was not able to discuss this before, but I was away and did not have access to the Wiki. I believe all editing concerning BRIO should cease. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 01:50, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 "If you find a page that you believe is not important; has nothing to with the Wooden Railway line; or is just redundant: edit the page, add the delete template to the page and write in the edit summary 'Administrator Review Please". Administrators will review the page and rule on the page's fate." This is taken form our Guidelines page. the BRIO page really has nothing to do with Thomas Wooden Railway, at all. Yes, there are similarities, but the BRIO line was not made by Learning Curve. I still, and will aways think, this page should be deleted along with all of the pictures of the BRIO products. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 19:19, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 You're gonna scream at what I'm about to propose. I believe a knockoffs page is appropriate showing pictures of all the ripoffs TWR has been subjected to over the years. OrigamiAirEnforcer 19:23, January 28, 2012 (UTC) I actually like the knockoff idea. Maybe we could merge BRIO and the Knockoffs into one page?Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 19:27, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 Nah, because BRIO is a legitimate company with a legitimate contract with the franchise. The knockoffs have no such contracts. Anyway, I got the idea seeing what I believe is a knockoff on eBay. OrigamiAirEnforcer 19:29, January 28, 2012 (UTC) Well, then I still want the BRIO page and pictures gone. I am currently in chat now, if anyone wishes to join me. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 19:31, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 :::Care to step into chat to talk? Message me if/when you do. OrigamiAirEnforcer 01:59, January 28, 2012 (UTC) :::James, I created the page not because it was compatible with TWR, but because it had a Thomas subdivision. Mellisa & Doug never did that. Mr.Conductor 02:18, January 28, 2012 (UTC) My final thoughts are as follow: I do not believe the page is needed. However, I am out numbered two to one and am fighting a pointless battle. Instead of wasting any more time an campaigning for the deletion of the BRIO page, I will use that time to edit pages and create new pages for new products. While I think the page is still pointless, it really does no harm to the Wiki, and, shall therefor stay, with my blessing. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 21:28, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 Your blessing is great and all, but it doesn't make up for the guideline infaction that the entire wiki will have to deal with now thanks to your actions. OrigamiAirEnforcer 21:37, January 28, 2012 (UTC) This really has nothing to do with that. It has to do with me not wasting my own time. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 21:44, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 Actually, it does. OrigamiAirEnforcer 22:10, January 28, 2012 (UTC) I meant my reason for ending the BRIO battle. Jamesis5 Toot! Toot! 22:50, January 28, 2012 (UTC)Jamesis5 I know, but what I'm talking about came from the BRIO battle, and now affects the entire wiki. OrigamiAirEnforcer 22:52, January 28, 2012 (UTC) It's amazing what a commotion this page made. I'm glad it's staying, though. Mr.Conductor 02:13, January 29, 2012 (UTC) Pictures Hello, this is FlyingDuckManGenesis. Now, usually I prefer there to be just one picture of one specific item on the page to avoid redundancy, but there can be exceptions. For instance, the pictures of Culdee on his page. I prefer for there to be two specific angles for each of Culdee's models to show both faces. This page also has one exception; if the two models are different from each other. For instance, some models of Duck have green wheels, while others have the correct black ones, thus, in my opinion, a picture of each of these models is necessary. Now, as of lately, some pictures of engines have been added, despite the fact that other pictures of the engines have been added before, but there is one difference between those pictures and the ones that have been added before; some pictures show the engines out of their boxes, while others show the engines in their boxes. Obviously, I don't want to get into any edit wars, but I'm not sure whether or not pictures of the same specific engines both in and out of their box are necessary, considering that this wiki focuses primarily on the Thomas Wooden Railway items made by Learning Curve and Fisher-Price, and all the BRIO items have mostly been confined to their own page. Opinions on this topic are welcome. FDMG, 10:53 A.M. Approx. FlyingDuckManGenesis (talk) 15:54, January 17, 2014 (UTC) : I have no major complaints regarding this page and the various photographs in use. I feel different variations ought to be seen if pictures are available to display their variety. OrigamiAirEnforcer (talk) 08:44, January 18, 2014 (UTC) ::: First of all, I don't understand why this is being discussed on the BRIO article, but here's my two cents. I feel like there is sometimes overkill in the pictures that are put up of the same things done at many angles. There should be pictures of each version of the item, what each item looked like in the box designs over the years as it proves what year they come from and what they looked like inside, and any prototype images. What I don't think there should be is items out of box with the box still seen in the picture, and anything in box should have no other products around it. That is, no group photos at all. Items can have a picture of the same product at another side or a closer look if it is neccessary to show something relevant, in that case, Culdee's rear face. Seperate components of sets or destinations can have their own image if it is something relevant, like an exclusive vehicle, as long as it is has a photo where nothing else can be seen. Jdogman (talk) 23:45, January 18, 2014 (UTC) Re:Toby having Mavis' face I don't know if mine is some bizarre factory error, but its face definitely looks closer to Mavis' face than Toby's. Remember how Hornby Arry and Bert have Splatter and Dodge's faces despite Hornby never making Splatter and Dodge? It looks like the same thing is going on here. Rexeljet (talk) 11:13, April 6, 2014 (UTC) Is This Page Needed Why do we need a page for this range? This wiki is for the Wooden Railway range, not Brio. The Steampunk Whovian (talk) 22:47, July 18, 2015 (UTC) It seems that this was already settled. This wiki is for all wooden Thomas items, not exclusively the ones made my Learning Curve and Mattel. CuldeeFan (talk) 00:44, July 19, 2015 (UTC) To quote the Guidelines page: "If you find a page that you believe is not important; has nothing to with the Wooden Railway line; or is just redundant: edit the page, add the delete template to the page and write in the edit summary 'Administrator Review Please". Administrators will review the page and determine the page's future." This page has nothing to do with the Thomas Wooden Railway range. The Steampunk Whovian (talk) 06:03, July 19, 2015 (UTC) : The page's contents are related to the TWR range; it documents BRIO's contributions. While Learning Curve, Mattel and Fisher Price have the majority of coverage on the Wiki due to a larger number of releases, BRIO is also entitled to coverage. OrigamiAirEnforcer (talk) 06:58, July 19, 2015 (UTC) :: Apologies to add fuel on to the fire here, but since I have never said anything about this page in my time on the wiki, I thought I would make a few points. I do not like how BRIO is covered on the wikia. When I think of the Thomas Wooden Railway, I think of "Thomas Wooden Railway™", not "Thomas wooden railway". Would that mean that the Ertl die-cast range wikia should cover the Take Along and Take-n-Play Thomas ranges when just because they share being made out of die-cast metal, the Bachmann, Hornby, Lionel, Marklin, and Tomix ranges be put on one wikia because they're all model trains, or the My First Thomas range by Golden Bear and the My First Thomas range by Fisher-Price share the same wikia because they have the same name? Even complex, the Thomas Interactive Railway by Learning Curve is compatible with Wooden Railway and Take Along too, and the 2014- Take-n-Play vehicles do share the same magnets as Wooden Railway vehicles. I find it awkward working around articles that feature the BRIO items because they are not special models, and by BRIO's standards they would be the generic version. There are no articles for BRIO sets and accessories as well. If anywhere, I would keep the BRIO Thomas range on a BRIO Wikia if one was made, or the BRIO Thomas Wikia, which I know is not in the best shape but could be fixed up by good willing contributors and writers. Jdogman (talk) 13:43, July 19, 2015 (UTC)